About your Search

20121202
20121210
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4 (some duplicates have been removed)
. unemployment hit rock bottom near the beginning of the -- under the bush administration. you can see this right here. and this of course the changing the color here is when president obama took over in january of '09. who is responsible for this turnaround? >> absolutely the president. and it would be a better turnaround if the republicans had allowed a bigger stimulus. we'd have many more jobs. >> you'd make the case we didn't spend enough on the economy? >> not only did we not spend enough, but we wasted 40% of it on tax cuts for small business, which is inherently savings and not stimulus. it was a real policy mistake. >> so considering where we are, and now 33 months of private sector job growth, is this historic? >> it's certainly we're going in the right direction, ed. we're not creating as many jobs as we need for the population growth, but it's astonishing we're recovering the way we are and if the republicans would stop creating the uncertainty, remember the uncertainty by not making a deal, we'd see the numbers improving very dramatically. >> well, let me ask you in terms of the stabi
the unemployment rate under president obama's administration. which of the president's policies have helped the most in this? >>. well very crucial to this has been his decision to get congress to extend unemployment benefits surprisingly. because when people have the money are spending it back in the economy. every 50th person you meet statistically only has food stamps today as income. and that's the result of these years of the republicans policies. so having unemployment and extendsing benefits next year would be important to bring the number down and having businesses hire more people because they have customer with money. >> if congress failed to pass the recovery act, the center on budget and policy priorities says we have added almost 1 million more jobs because of the stimulus package. why are the republicans fighting stimulus spending now? why? is it they don't want to see president obama succeed or do they believe spending more money is not the right thing to do? >> i think both of those are true. they do not want him to succeed. there's no question about that. they are certain s
.s. and other countries. explain. guest: this is a longstanding concern and one reason why the obama administration has said they're not interested in sending sophisticated weapons and to syria. the organization referred to in the article is considered one of the most effective fighting groups on the ground. many of the members are seasoned fighters from the i wrapped insurgency. there also -- iraq insurgency. while they may be somewhat smaller raley numbers, they're far more effective on the ground and it is a growing cause for concern in the situation in syria continues to deteriorate. the u.s. has decided or looks like they will designate the front as a terrorist organization. in that way, that may put some controls on the funding going into this organization and isolated from the other rebel groups on the ground. fact of the matter is in an environment as volatile as the one in syria, without a major presence on the ground, it's quite difficult to deal with an organization like this one. host: this photograph gives you just one neighborhood back in may in damascus with the broade
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4 (some duplicates have been removed)